So last class we were talking about how people choose to recollect events or people throughout their lives, and I think that is a very interesting concept of how people choose to recall facts of life. I think it was in my Criminal Justice class in high school that we talked about the reliability of witnesses and how different people choose to remember events such as murders differently. It makes me thing of involuntary memory. Obviously these people are sworn to oath and aren't necessarily meaning to lie or distort the truth, but it happens every time. I feel like the only difference between the court room and literature is an author's affinity towards making things sound more eloquent. I know that when I tell stories I sometimes choose to omit things that make me seem like a bad person or things that will harm my argument.
Reconsidering last class, I think it was a good point to mention the trustworthiness of Mrs. Dalloway. There certainly are a good number of coincidences that don't tend to lean towards reality (if we could see the whole picture).
Can we trust an author's "aha" moments? they are the ones who recall this "coming to being" moments. Hmmm.
In Mrs Dalloway we can also see how other forces can distort one's perceptions. Sigmund has shellshock, acquired by sitting in the trenches in WWI and being continuously hammered by explosions from incoming artillery. While the explosion and shrapnel may have missed Sigmund, the concussions, loud noise, and the fear that a shell could land on you and kill you takes its toll on the human body. Now Sigmund's mind is distorted and somewhat twisted. Whatever memories he had may not be things that other people recognize.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of The Sandman when we were talking about the role of the narrator. I mentioned that the last narrator was there because if it was written in the voice of Nathaniel we wouldn't get the full story. We wouldn't be able to trust his side of the story because of distorting the facts to make himself look good.
ReplyDelete